We are forking D

[Paolo Invernizzi]

On Tuesday, 9 January 2024 at 21:56:55 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 1/9/2024 10:23 AM, Abdulhaq wrote:
>> * Languages such as D need a BDFL who spends more time 
>> managing and orchestrating developments than cutting their own 
>> code.
>
> The trouble is there are some coding problems that only I can 
> resolve. For example, nobody else is crazy enough to have 
> embedded a C compiler into D. Heck, I thought it was a crazy 
> idea for a couple decades.
>
> Would anyone else have implemented an ownership/borrowing 
> system for D? It exists as a prototype in the compiler now, 
> though it's been fallow for a bit as too many other things are 
> happening. I know its design is controversial (Timon doesn't 
> like it at all!), and it hasn't yet proven itself.
>
> Many bugzilla issues get forwarded to me because nobody else 
> seems to want to or are able to fix them.
>
> I've been slowly working on restructuring the front end so it 
> is more understandable and tractable.
>
> I'm also very impressed with how far along Razvan and Dennis 
> have come in being able to deal with difficult compiler 
> problems.

Nobody is asking you to solve all the problem, I'm here for 
almost 20 years now, following and actively using (taking unfair 
advantages?) of D at work.

I've the impression that things are slowly moving on, and right 
now it's a pivot point for D history, just like as it was turning 
it open source, or the joining of Andrei and the first book, 
something similar.

You, Walter, created an incredible useful language (and a 
beautiful one!), so you have all my respect, it's clear in my 
mind how big the effort was in the past, and still it is: I've 
followed your effort since pre D1.

A fork can revitalise D, as Rust, and the flourishing of other 
new modern languages shock C++ , I think all the best about Adam, 
he is able to produce an incredible amount of code that actually 
DO the job.  I will not bet against the failure of OpenD, 
ironically Adam is VERY pragmatic.

And pragmatism was what first attracted me to D,  pragmatic view 
about problems: we have a big problem right now, so let's try to 
find a way to resolve it in a pragmatic way.

The D programming language does not need another Kenji event. D 
can't loose talented contributors just for the sake of 
"formatting": that was an incredible fool example of total 
nonsense, and the net loss for the community was terribly hight.

Pragmatically, again, D core members need to sit down (hopefully 
in front of a good beer!) and find an escape path. My humble 
suggestion, from what I see and I've seen in the past.

Literally NOBODY is on DIP 1027 camp. This means that EVERYONE 
sometimes is wrong, also if not convinced at all. There should be 
a mechanism that triggers in that case: “Logic clearly dictates 
that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.", How 
am I to contradict Spock? With this mechanism in place, DIP 
DIP1036e should be merged. Yes, the same happened with safe by 
default.

Also, add a third person to the Walter/Atila duo, a member of the 
community with better focus and understanding about the attitude 
of the community, but also a strong tech view of D.

My ideal choice would be Steven (but hey, maybe Steven is 
horrified by the idea), as Mike is already doing a great job in 
his role.

As someone said, a modest proposal.

/P